I move amendment No. 58:—
In page 28, line 36, Section 52 (3), before the word "copper" to insert the words "made up of."
There was some question as to the wording there. It is simply a matter of phrasing.
Central Bank Bill, 1942—Report (Resumed).
Amendment put and agreed to.
I move amendment No. 59:—
In page 30, before Section 58, to insert a new section as follows:—
Section 3 of the Currency (Amendment) Act, 1930 (No. 30 of 1930), is hereby amended as follows, that is to say:—
(a) by the deletion of the word "unanimously" where it occurs in sub-section (1), and
(b) by the deletion of the word "unanimous" where it occurs in sub-section (2), and
(c) by the insertion in sub-section (3) after the word "sub-sections" of the words "upon a request of the Commission which is not unanimous," and
(d) by the insertion, before sub-section (4), of a new sub-section as follows, that is to say:—
(3a) Every order made under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of this section on a unanimous request of the Commission shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas as soon as may be after it is made, and if a resolution annulling such order is passed by either such House within the next subsequent twenty-one days on which such House has sat after such order is laid before it, such order shall be annulled accordingly, but without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under such order.
This amendment is moved for the purpose of carrying out the general intention which was indicated during the debate in Committee, and also, perhaps, on Second Reading, namely, that there should be two lines of approach in order to add new securities, etc., in accordance with Section 3 of the Currency Act, as a backing for currency. It was suggested that the matter could be dealt with in either of two ways. If the bank board were unanimous about it, and the Minister agreed, it could be put through. There was no question in that case of coming before the Dáil at all. It was felt that, if there was unanimity in a body, composed as the board would be, there must be a strong argument for taking such action, that it was a matter which should be done quickly, and that it would be sufficient for the Minister for Finance, acting in the interests of the community as a whole, to give his concurrence. If, on the other hand, there was a division of opinion amongst the members of the board, if the board wanted other securities as backing beside sterling, and if the Minister agreed with the view of the board as expressed by a majority, it was felt that before the view of the board and the Minister could become effective it would have to come before the two Houses of Parliament for express ratification by means of a resolution. I think that that is a fair attempt to meet all points of view. It was felt that if we had unanimity on the board their decision should be made absolute, but you might never get unanimity and it might be very desirable in the national interest that other securities should be added, but the matter might never get beyond the board or might never come to the Minister. If, however, there was a majority decision with which the Minister agreed, it was felt that the public interest aspect of the matter could be determined by Parliament by means of a resolution. We have discussed the question before and I do not think it is necessary to go into it again.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 60:—
In page 31, First Schedule, Part I, before the portion relating to Section 47, to insert:—
|
Sections 40 and 41. |
The whole of each section. |
The appointed day. |
This is a consequential amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 61 was disposed of on a previous Stage.
Question—"That the Bill, as amended, be received for final consideration"—put and agreed to.
When is it proposed to take the Fifth Stage?
Is there any hope of taking it now?
Let us digest it overnight.
Fifth Stage ordered for Friday, 17th July.